Friday, August 7, 2009

How A St. Louis Accord Should Differ From Dallas

Mik, I've expanded the blog posting to clarify what I think this language says. I see this as different from the Dallas Accord in at least the following ways:

It summarizes/clarifies the LP's purpose and goal.

It declares the the LP should unite voters who want more liberty.

It implicitly rejects the two competing Pledge interpretations of "we're not revolutionaries!" and "smash the state!".

It suggests an ideological baseline for the LP: never adding to aggression, seeking to banish it, and always advocating full rights to your body, labor, peaceful production, and voluntary exchanges.

It explicitly says that principled Libertarians can disagree about the details of what constitutes aggression.

It explicitly commits the LP to not contradicting anarchism (whereas the DA was implicit/unofficial).

It implicitly commits the LP to not contradicting minarchism through Rothbard's tactic (admitted in a 1983 letter) of systematically opposing every possible function of government.

I see this as a convention resolution. It could almost fit into the Platform Preamble, but it's probably too inward-facing for that. It definitely cannot be targeted for the SoP as long as the 7/8 rule is in effect.